TY - JOUR
T1 - Intrauterine Insemination After Human Chorionic Gonadotropin Trigger or Luteinizing Hormone Surge
T2 - A Meta-analysis
AU - Potapragada, Nivedita R.
AU - Babayev, Elnur
AU - Strom, Danielle
AU - Beestrum, Molly
AU - Schauer, Jacob M.
AU - Jungheim, Emily S.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2023 Lippincott Williams and Wilkins. All rights reserved.
PY - 2023/7/1
Y1 - 2023/7/1
N2 - OBJECTIVE:To assess the odds of pregnancy after intrauterine insemination (IUI) timed by ultrasound monitoring and human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) administration compared with monitoring luteinizing hormone (LH) levels.DATA SOURCES:We searched PubMed (MEDLINE), EMBASE (Elsevier), Scopus (Elsevier), Web of Science (Clarivate Analytics), ClinicalTrials.gov (National Institutes of Health), and the Cochrane Library (Wiley) from the inception until October 1, 2022. No language limitations were applied.METHODS OF STUDY SELECTION:After deduplication, 3,607 unique citations were subjected to blinded independent review by three investigators. Thirteen studies (five retrospective cohort, four cross-sectional, two randomized controlled trials, and two randomized crossover studies) that enrolled women undergoing natural cycle, oral medication (clomid or letrozole), or both for IUI were included in the final random-effects model meta-analysis. Methodologic quality of included studies was assessed with the Downs and Black checklist.TABULATION, INTEGRATION, AND RESULTS:Data extraction was compiled by two authors, including publication information, hCG and LH monitoring guidelines, and pregnancy outcomes. No significant difference in odds of pregnancy between hCG administration and endogenous LH monitoring was observed (odds ratio [OR] 0.92, 95% CI 0.69-1.22, P=.53). Subgroup analysis of the five studies that included natural cycle IUI outcomes also showed no significant difference in odds of pregnancy between the two methods (OR 0.88, 95% CI 0.46-1.69, P=.61). Finally, a subgroup analysis of 10 studies that included women who underwent ovarian stimulation with oral medications (clomid or letrozole) did not demonstrate a difference in odds of pregnancy between ultrasonography with hCG trigger and LH-timed IUI (OR 0.88, 95% CI 0.66-1.16, P=.32). Statistically significant heterogeneity was noted between studies.CONCLUSION:This meta-analysis showed no difference between pregnancy outcomes between at-home LH monitoring and timed IUI.SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION:PROSPERO, CRD42021230520.
AB - OBJECTIVE:To assess the odds of pregnancy after intrauterine insemination (IUI) timed by ultrasound monitoring and human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) administration compared with monitoring luteinizing hormone (LH) levels.DATA SOURCES:We searched PubMed (MEDLINE), EMBASE (Elsevier), Scopus (Elsevier), Web of Science (Clarivate Analytics), ClinicalTrials.gov (National Institutes of Health), and the Cochrane Library (Wiley) from the inception until October 1, 2022. No language limitations were applied.METHODS OF STUDY SELECTION:After deduplication, 3,607 unique citations were subjected to blinded independent review by three investigators. Thirteen studies (five retrospective cohort, four cross-sectional, two randomized controlled trials, and two randomized crossover studies) that enrolled women undergoing natural cycle, oral medication (clomid or letrozole), or both for IUI were included in the final random-effects model meta-analysis. Methodologic quality of included studies was assessed with the Downs and Black checklist.TABULATION, INTEGRATION, AND RESULTS:Data extraction was compiled by two authors, including publication information, hCG and LH monitoring guidelines, and pregnancy outcomes. No significant difference in odds of pregnancy between hCG administration and endogenous LH monitoring was observed (odds ratio [OR] 0.92, 95% CI 0.69-1.22, P=.53). Subgroup analysis of the five studies that included natural cycle IUI outcomes also showed no significant difference in odds of pregnancy between the two methods (OR 0.88, 95% CI 0.46-1.69, P=.61). Finally, a subgroup analysis of 10 studies that included women who underwent ovarian stimulation with oral medications (clomid or letrozole) did not demonstrate a difference in odds of pregnancy between ultrasonography with hCG trigger and LH-timed IUI (OR 0.88, 95% CI 0.66-1.16, P=.32). Statistically significant heterogeneity was noted between studies.CONCLUSION:This meta-analysis showed no difference between pregnancy outcomes between at-home LH monitoring and timed IUI.SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION:PROSPERO, CRD42021230520.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85163881423&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85163881423&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1097/AOG.0000000000005222
DO - 10.1097/AOG.0000000000005222
M3 - Review article
C2 - 37290111
AN - SCOPUS:85163881423
SN - 0029-7844
VL - 142
SP - 61
EP - 70
JO - Obstetrics and gynecology
JF - Obstetrics and gynecology
IS - 1
ER -